For now, following along with this seems way better than the current state of affairs: https://github.com/apache/fineract <https://github.com/apache/fineract>
Specifically, check out the README.md <https://github.com/apache/fineract/blob/develop/README.md>, gradlew <https://github.com/apache/fineract/blob/develop/gradlew>, and gradlew.bat <https://github.com/apache/fineract/blob/develop/gradlew.bat> This is in line with the latest info from https://s.apache.org/xFJg <https://s.apache.org/xFJg>. -- Joel Baranick [email protected] > On Mar 22, 2018, at 11:21 AM, Abhishek Tiwari <[email protected]> wrote: > > @Joel > In our last RC mail thread, Olivier pointed to this: > >> >> *I still there will be an issue regarding the gradle jar wrapper and >> I**invite >> you to have a look at this comment https://s.apache.org/xFJg >> <https://s.apache.org/xFJg>* > > > And, per the Gradle wrapper documentation, not including gradle jar wrapper > doesn't seem to be an option: > >> *Note: To make the Wrapper files available to other developers and >> execution environments you’ll need to check them into version control. All >> Wrapper files including the JAR file are very small in size. Adding the JAR >> file to version control is expected. Some organizations do not allow >> projects to submit binary files to version control. At the moment there are >> no alternative options to the approach.* > > > So, I think the way out is to document the Gradle version in README, and > use that? > > @Olivier > I can add a line to README, would that mean a new RC? > > Thanks, > Abhishek > > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Joel Baranick <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We should use a grade wrapper. >> >> — >> Joel Baranick >> [email protected] >> >>> On Mar 22, 2018, at 5:12 AM, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> +1 (sigs ok, content verified and seems ok) >>> >>> My only concern is a missing information on the gradle version needed to >>> build. >>> Using last 4.6 generate an error. Maybe adding supported gradle version >> in >>> README >>> but definitely nothing blocker >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 at 23:57, Abhishek Tiwari <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I'd like to call a vote to release Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 (Incubating). >>>> >>>> The previous release candidate RC0 did not pass vote: >>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg62151.html >>>> >>>> As required, the LICENSE and NOTICE files have been updated (tracked by >>>> GOBBLIN-431 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOBBLIN-431>), and >> the >>>> new source release candidate RC1 has been created. It can be downloaded >>>> here: >>>> >>>> >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/gobblin/ >> apache-gobblin-incubating-0.12.0-rc1/ >>>> >>>> The artifacts (i.e. JARs) corresponding to this release candidate can be >>>> found here: >>>> >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ >> orgapachegobblin-1001 >>>> >>>> This has been signed with PGP key 234E3FE3, corresponding to >>>> [email protected], which is included in the repository's KEYS file. This >>>> key can be found on keyservers, such as: >>>> >>>> *http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x234E3FE3 >>>> <http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x234E3FE3>* >>>> >>>> It is also listed here: >>>> >>>> https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/abti.asc >>>> >>>> The release candidate has been tagged with release-0.12.0-rc1. >>>> I've also created a branch 0.12.0. >>>> >>>> For reference, here is a list of all closed JIRAs tagged with 0.12.0: >>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20% >> 3D%20GOBBLIN%20AND% >>>> 20fixVersion%20%3D%200.12.0%20AND%20status%20in%20(Closed% >>>> >>>> 2C%20Resolved)%20ORDER%20BY%20updatedDate%20DESC%2C% >> 20createdDate%20DESC%2C% >>>> 20status%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC >>>> >>>> For a summary of the changes in this release, see: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-gobblin/blob/0.12.0/CHANGELOG.md >>>> >>>> Please review and vote. The vote will be open for 72 hours (ends on >>>> Saturday, 24 March 2018, 6:30 AM PST). >>>> >>>> [ ] +1 approve >>>> [ ] +0 no opinion >>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) >>>> >>>> My vote: +1 >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Abhishek >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Olivier Lamy >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >>
